Connect with us

Technology

Autohome Inc. Announces Unaudited Second Quarter and Interim 2024 Financial Results

Published

on

BEIJING, July 31, 2024 /PRNewswire/ — Autohome Inc. (NYSE: ATHM; HKEX: 2518) (“Autohome” or the “Company”), the leading online destination for automobile consumers in China, today announced its unaudited financial results for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2024.

Second Quarter 2024 Highlights[1]

Net revenues in the second quarter of 2024 were RMB1,872.6 million (US$257.7 million), compared to RMB1,833.0 million in the corresponding period of 2023.Net income attributable to Autohome in the second quarter of 2024 was RMB524.8 million (US$72.2 million), compared to RMB504.7 million in the corresponding period of 2023, while net income attributable to ordinary shareholders in the second quarter of 2024 was RMB509.7 million (US$70.1 million), compared to RMB491.2 million in the corresponding period of 2023.Adjusted net income attributable to Autohome (Non-GAAP)[2] in the second quarter of 2024 was RMB572.4 million (US$78.8 million), compared to RMB569.5 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Mr. Tao Wu, Chief Executive Officer of Autohome, stated, “We are pleased to deliver another solid quarter, highlighted by sustained growth in net revenues, a substantial increase in user traffic, and remarkable progress made in our innovative business initiatives. On content, our diverse and high-quality offerings, bolstered by our strong IP content matrix, has worked to consistently expand our user base and enhance user engagement. According to QuestMobile, our number of average mobile daily active users grew by 8.3% year-over-year, reaching 67.91 million in June, underscoring our leading position in the automotive media vertical. For our innovative businesses, we launched our Satellite Plan in May, a strategic initiative to establish satellite stores in lower-tier cities adjacent to flagship Autohome Space stores. This initiative will accelerate our network expansion, facilitating deeper penetration into broader geographical markets. Looking ahead, we remain committed to exploring new business areas and leveraging Ping An’s resources to enhance our long-term industry competitiveness.”

Mr. Craig Yan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer of Autohome, added, “Our focus on innovative businesses has led to robust growth in our data products and new energy vehicle (“NEV”) business, with double-digit year-over-year increases in quarterly revenues. We have maintained a healthy balance sheet while driving the development of our businesses and fulfilling our commitment to provide stable shareholder returns. Moving forward, we will continue to focus on areas of emerging growth while maintaining stringent cost controls to ensure long-term shareholder value.”

Unaudited Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

Net Revenues

Net revenues in the second quarter of 2024 were RMB1,872.6 million (US$257.7 million), compared to RMB1,833.0 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Media services revenues were RMB432.9 million (US$59.6 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB532.0 million in the corresponding period of 2023.Leads generation services revenues were RMB820.3 million (US$112.9 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB759.6 million in the corresponding period of 2023.Online marketplace and others revenues were RMB619.4 million (US$85.2 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB541.4 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Cost of Revenues

Cost of revenues was RMB346.1 million (US$47.6 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB330.2 million in the corresponding period of 2023. Share-based compensation expense included in cost of revenues in the second quarter of 2024 was RMB1.9 million (US$0.3 million), compared to RMB1.8 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses were RMB1,185.3 million (US$163.1 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB1,228.1 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Sales and marketing expenses were RMB752.5 million (US$103.6 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB824.1 million in the corresponding period of 2023, due primarily to a decrease in marketing and promotional expenses. Share-based compensation expenses included in sales and marketing expenses in the second quarter of 2024 were RMB10.1 million (US$1.4 million), compared to RMB12.3 million in the corresponding period of 2023.General and administrative expenses were RMB117.6 million (US$16.2 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB91.0 million in the corresponding period of 2023. Share-based compensation expenses included in general and administrative expenses in the second quarter of 2024 were RMB10.4 million (US$1.4 million), compared to RMB8.9 million in the corresponding period of 2023.Product development expenses were RMB315.2 million (US$43.4 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB313.0 million in the corresponding period of 2023. Share-based compensation expenses included in product development expenses in the second quarter of 2024 were RMB18.8 million (US$2.6 million), compared to RMB18.7 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Operating Profit

Operating profit was RMB412.4 million (US$56.7 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB341.5 million in the corresponding period of 2023. 

Income Tax Expense

Income tax expense was RMB102.2 million (US$14.1 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB35.8 million in the corresponding period of 2023. The increase in income tax expense was primarily attributable to a withholding tax related to the declared cash dividend plan for 2024 and beyond, and the tax filing adjustments of the previous year.

Net Income Attributable to Autohome

Net income attributable to Autohome was RMB524.8 million (US$72.2 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB504.7 million in the corresponding period of 2023.

Net Income Attributable to Ordinary Shareholders and Earnings per Share/ADS

Net income attributable to ordinary shareholders was RMB509.7 million (US$70.1 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB491.2 million in the corresponding period of 2023. Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) were RMB1.05 (US$0.14) and RMB1.05 (US$0.14), respectively, in the second quarter of 2024, compared to basic and diluted EPS of RMB1.00 and RMB1.00, respectively, in the corresponding period of 2023. Basic and diluted earnings per ADS were RMB4.20 (US$0.58) and RMB4.19 (US$0.58), respectively, in the second quarter of 2024, compared to basic and diluted earnings per ADS of RMB3.99 and RMB3.98, respectively, in the corresponding period of 2023.

Adjusted Net Income Attributable to Autohome (Non-GAAP) and Non-GAAP EPS/ADS

Adjusted net income attributable to Autohome (Non-GAAP) was RMB572.4 million (US$78.8 million) in the second quarter of 2024, compared to RMB569.5 million in the corresponding period of 2023. Non-GAAP basic and diluted EPS were RMB1.18 (US$0.16) and RMB1.18 (US$0.16), respectively, in the second quarter of 2024, compared to non-GAAP basic and diluted EPS of RMB1.16 and RMB1.15, respectively, in the corresponding period of 2023. Non-GAAP basic and diluted earnings per ADS were RMB4.72 (US$0.65) and RMB4.71 (US$0.65), respectively, in the second quarter of 2024, compared to non-GAAP basic and diluted earnings per ADS of RMB4.62 and RMB4.61, respectively, in the corresponding period of 2023.

Balance Sheet and Cash Flow

As of June 30, 2024, the Company had cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments of RMB23.47 billion (US$3.23 billion). Net cash provided by operating activities in the second quarter of 2024 was RMB452.0 million (US$62.2 million).

Employees 

The Company had 5,078 employees as of June 30, 2024, including 1,755 employees from TTP Car, Inc.

Conference Call Information

The Company will host an earnings conference call at 8:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 31, 2024 (8:00 p.m. Beijing Time on the same day).

Please register in advance of the conference call using the registration link provided below. Upon registering, each participant will receive a set of participant dial-in numbers and a personal PIN, which will be used to join the conference call.

Registration Link: https://register.vevent.com/register/BIfd7c475745884d119c4c12c24ed8f0f5

Please use the conference access information to join the call 10 minutes before the call is scheduled to begin.

Additionally, a live and archived webcast of the conference call will be available at https://ir.autohome.com.cn and a replay of the webcast will be available following the session.

About Autohome

Autohome Inc. (NYSE: ATHM; HKEX: 2518) is the leading online destination for automobile consumers in China. Its mission is to relentlessly reduce auto industry decision-making and transaction costs driven by advanced technology. Autohome provides occupationally generated content, professionally generated content, user-generated content, and AI-generated content, a comprehensive automobile library, and extensive automobile listing information to automobile consumers, covering the entire car purchase and ownership cycle. The ability to reach a large and engaged user base of automobile consumers has made Autohome a preferred platform for automakers and dealers to conduct their advertising campaigns. Further, the Company’s dealer subscription and advertising services allow dealers to market their inventory and services through Autohome’s platform, extending the reach of their physical showrooms to potentially millions of internet users in China and generating sales leads for them. The Company offers sales leads, data analysis, and marketing services to assist automakers and dealers with improving their efficiency and facilitating transactions. Further, through its websites and mobile applications, it also provides other value-added services, including auto financing, auto insurance, used car transactions, and aftermarket services. For further information, please visit https://www.autohome.com.cn/.

Safe Harbor Statement 

This press release contains statements that may constitute “forward-looking” statements pursuant to the “safe harbor” provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “will”, “expects”, “anticipates”, “future”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “estimates” and similar statements. Among other things, Autohome’s business outlook, Autohome’s strategic and operational plans and quotations from management in this announcement contain forward-looking statements. Autohome may also make written or oral forward-looking statements in its periodic reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), in announcements made on the website of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited (the “Hong Kong Stock Exchange”), in its annual report to shareholders, in press releases and other written materials and in oral statements made by its officers, directors or employees to third parties. Statements that are not historical facts, including statements about Autohome’s beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. A number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement, including but not limited to the following: Autohome’s goals and strategies; Autohome’s future business development, results of operations and financial condition; the expected growth of the online automobile advertising market in China; Autohome’s ability to attract and retain users and advertisers and further enhance its brand recognition; Autohome’s expectations regarding demand for and market acceptance of its products and services; competition in the online automobile advertising industry; relevant government policies and regulatory environment of China; fluctuations in general economic and business conditions in China and assumptions underlying or related to any of the foregoing. Further information regarding these and other risks is included in Autohome’s filings with the SEC and announcements on the website of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. All information provided in this press release is as of the date of this press release, and Autohome does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement, except as required under applicable law.

Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures 

To supplement net income presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP, we use Adjusted Net Income attributable to Autohome, Non-GAAP basic and diluted EPS and earnings per ADS, Adjusted net margin and Adjusted EBITDA as non-GAAP financial measures. We define Adjusted Net Income attributable to Autohome as net income attributable to Autohome excluding share-based compensation expenses, amortization of intangible assets resulting from business acquisition, investment loss relating to non-operating impact of a write-down of the initial investment in a financial product, and loss/(gain) pickup of equity method investments, with all the reconciliation items adjusted for related income tax effects. We define non-GAAP basic and diluted EPS as Adjusted Net Income attributable to Autohome divided by the basic and diluted weighted average number of ordinary shares. We define non-GAAP basic and diluted earnings per ADS as Adjusted Net Income attributable to Autohome divided by the basic and diluted weighted average number of ADSs. We define Adjusted net margin as Adjusted Net Income attributable to Autohome divided by total net revenues. We define Adjusted EBITDA as net income attributable to Autohome before income tax expense, depreciation expenses of property and equipment, amortization expenses of intangible assets and share-based compensation expenses. We present these non-GAAP financial measures because they are used by our management to evaluate our operating performance, in addition to net income prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are important to help investors understand our operating and financial performance, compare business trends among different reporting periods on a consistent basis and assess our core operating results, as they exclude certain non-cash charges or items that are non-operating in nature. The use of the above non-GAAP financial measures has certain limitations as they excluded certain items that have been and will continue to be incurred in the future, but such items should be considered in the overall evaluation of our results. These non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP, but should not be considered a substitute for, or superior to, financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP. For more information on these non-GAAP financial measures, please see the table captioned “Unaudited Reconciliation of non-GAAP and GAAP Results” set forth at the end of this press release.

For investor and media inquiries, please contact:

Autohome Inc.
Investor Relations
Sterling Song
Investor Relations Director  
Tel: +86-10-5985-7483
E-mail: ir@autohome.com.cn 

Christensen China Limited 
Suri Cheng
Tel: +86-185-0060-8364
E-mail:  suri.cheng@christensencomms.com

 

 

 

AUTOHOME INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS DATA
(Amount in thousands, except per share / per ADS data) 

 For three months ended June 30, 

For six months ended June 30, 

2023

2024

2023

2024

RMB

RMB

US$

RMB

RMB

US$

Net revenues: 

Media services

532,005

432,858

59,563

893,473

760,289

104,619

Leads generation services 

759,635

820,271

112,873

1,440,269

1,546,694

212,832

Online marketplace and others

541,394

619,425

85,236

1,032,921

1,174,636

161,635

Total net revenues 

1,833,034

1,872,554

257,672

3,366,663

3,481,619

479,086

Cost of revenues

(330,227)

(346,102)

(47,625)

(670,441)

(646,994)

(89,029)

Gross profit 

1,502,807

1,526,452

210,047

2,696,222

2,834,625

390,057

Operating expenses: 

Sales and marketing expenses 

(824,081)

(752,543)

(103,553)

(1,347,197)

(1,393,819)

(191,796)

General and administrative
   expenses 

(90,979)

 

(117,564)

 

(16,177)

(240,135)

 

(267,109)

 

(36,755)

Product development expenses 

(313,010)

(315,230)

(43,377)

(637,376)

(651,297)

(89,621)

Total operating expenses

(1,228,070)

(1,185,337)

(163,107)

(2,224,708)

(2,312,225)

(318,172)

Other operating income, net

66,772

71,279

9,808

133,160

166,072

22,852

Operating profit

341,509

412,394

56,748

604,674

688,472

94,737

Interest and investment income,
net

202,813

 

189,053

26,015

427,828

 

409,027

 

56,284

(Loss)/income from equity method
   investments

 

(1,690)

 

4,640

638

(33,125)

 

(44,493)

 

(6,122)

Income before income taxes 

542,632

606,087

83,401

999,377

1,053,006

144,899

Income tax expense

(35,796)

(102,165)

(14,058)

(90,477)

(170,566)

(23,471)

Net income 

506,836

503,922

69,343

908,900

882,440

121,428

Net (income)/loss attributable to
   noncontrolling interests

(2,102)

20,839

2,868

1,336

 

36,820

 

5,067

Net income attributable to
   Autohome

 

504,734

524,761

72,211

910,236

 

919,260

 

126,495

Accretion of mezzanine equity

(38,686)

(42,687)

(5,874)

(75,185)

(84,358)

(11,608)

Accretion attributable to
   noncontrolling interests

 

25,164

 

27,599

3,798

48,913

 

54,547

 

7,506

Net income attributable to
   ordinary shareholders

 

491,212

 

509,673

70,135

883,964

 

889,449

 

122,393

Earnings per share attributable to
   ordinary shareholders 

Basic 

1.00

1.05

0.14

1.79

1.84

0.25

Diluted 

1.00

1.05

0.14

1.79

1.83

0.25

Earnings per ADS attributable
   to ordinary shareholders (one
   ADS equals for four ordinary
   shares)

Basic 

3.99

4.20

0.58

7.17

7.34

1.01

Diluted 

3.98

4.19

0.58

7.15

7.32

1.01

Weighted average shares used to compute
   earnings per share attributable to ordinary
   shareholders:

 Basic 

492,534,428

484,860,625

484,860,625

492,927,049

484,569,763

484,569,763

 Diluted

493,624,704

486,591,693

486,591,693

494,261,429

486,029,303

486,029,303

 

 

 

AUTOHOME INC.
UNAUDITED RECONCILIATIONS OF NON-GAAP AND GAAP RESULTS
(Amount in thousands, except per share / per ADS data)

For three months ended June 30,

For six months ended June 30,

2023

2024

2023

2024

RMB  

RMB  

US$

RMB  

RMB

US$

Net income attributable to
   Autohome

504,734

524,761

72,211

910,236

 

919,260

 

126,495

Plus: income tax expense

37,136

103,505

14,243

93,157

173,247

23,840

Plus: depreciation of property and
   equipment

42,259

31,750

4,369

90,197

 

65,284

 

8,983

Plus: amortization of intangible
   assets

10,798

9,650

1,328

21,638

 

19,300

 

2,656

EBITDA

594,927

669,666

92,151

1,115,228

1,177,091

161,974

Plus: share-based compensation
   expenses

41,628

41,188

5,668

87,813

 

89,495

 

12,315

Adjusted EBITDA

636,555

710,854

97,819

1,203,041

1,266,586

174,289

Net income attributable to
   Autohome

504,734

524,761

72,211

910,236

 

919,260

 

126,495

Plus: amortization of intangible assets
   resulting from business acquisition

10,722

9,583

1,319

21,444

 

19,166

 

2,637

Plus: share-based compensation
   expenses

41,628

41,188

5,668

87,813

 

89,495

 

12,315

Plus: investment loss arising from one of
   financial products[3]

14,532

2,906

400

8,719

 

2,906

 

400

Plus: loss/(gain) on equity method
   investments, net

1,690

(4,640)

(638)

33,125

 

44,493

 

6,122

Plus: tax effects of the adjustments

(3,840)

(1,360)

(187)

(8,360)

(8,954)

(1,232)

Adjusted net income attributable
   to Autohome

569,466

572,438

78,773

 

1,052,977

 

1,066,366

 

146,737

Net income attributable to
   Autohome

504,734

524,761

72,211

910,236

 

919,260

 

126,495

Net margin

27.5 %

28.0 %

28.0 %

27.0 %

26.4 %

26.4 %

Adjusted net income attributable
   to Autohome

569,466

572,438

78,773

1,052,977

1,066,366

146,737

Adjusted net margin

31.1 %

30.6 %

30.6 %

31.3 %

30.6 %

30.6 %

Non-GAAP earnings per share

Basic

1.16

1.18

0.16

2.14

2.20

0.30

Diluted

1.15

1.18

0.16

2.13

2.19

0.30

Non-GAAP earnings per ADS
(one ADS equals for four ordinary
shares)

Basic

4.62

4.72

0.65

8.54

8.80

1.21

Diluted

4.61

4.71

0.65

8.52

8.78

1.21

Weighted average shares used to
   compute non-GAAP earnings
   per share:

Basic

492,534,428

484,860,625

484,860,625

492,927,049

484,569,763

484,569,763

Diluted

493,624,704

486,591,693

486,591,693

494,261,429

486,029,303

486,029,303

 

 

 

AUTOHOME INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Amount in thousands, except as noted) 

As of
December 31,

As of June 30,

2023

2024

RMB

RMB

US$

ASSETS

Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents

4,996,353

3,881,952

534,174

Restricted cash

126,794

107,964

14,856

Short-term investments

18,552,354

19,593,011

2,696,088

Accounts receivable, net

1,472,489

1,350,567

185,844

Amounts due from related parties, current

16,439

30,233

4,160

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

360,559

423,411

58,263

Total current assets

25,524,988

25,387,138

3,493,385

Non-current assets

Restricted cash, non-current

5,000

5,000

688

Property and equipment, net

200,860

194,067

26,705

Goodwill and intangible assets, net

4,143,968

4,106,799

565,114

Long-term investments

448,341

403,848

55,571

Deferred tax assets

295,598

295,598

40,676

Amounts due from related parties, non-current

16,048

13,839

1,904

Other non-current assets

200,928

157,102

21,619

Total non-current assets

5,310,743

5,176,253

712,277

Total assets

30,835,731

30,563,391

4,205,662

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

Current liabilities

Accrued expenses and other payables

2,932,227

2,227,929

306,573

Advance from customers

105,379

102,623

14,121

Deferred revenue

801,581

1,156,160

159,093

Income tax payable

227,260

338,306

46,552

Amounts due to related parties

24,572

31,878

4,387

Dividends payable

984,332

493,881

67,960

Total current liabilities

5,075,351

4,350,777

598,686

Non-current liabilities

Other liabilities

89,187

58,622

8,067

Deferred tax liabilities

497,955

472,481

65,016

Total non-current liabilities

587,142

531,103

73,083

Total liabilities

5,662,493

4,881,880

671,769

MEZZANINE EQUITY

Convertible redeemable noncontrolling interests    

1,758,933

1,843,291

253,645

EQUITY

Total Autohome shareholders’ equity

23,928,187

24,443,437

3,363,529

Noncontrolling interests

(513,882)

(605,217)

(83,281)

Total equity

23,414,305

23,838,220

3,280,248

Total liabilities, mezzanine equity and equity

30,835,731

30,563,391

4,205,662

 

UNAUDITED RECONCILIATION BETWEEN U.S. GAAP AND IFRS

The unaudited condensed consolidated statements of income for the six month ended June 30, 2024 and the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2024 (collectively, the “Unaudited Interim Financial Statements”) of Autohome Inc., its subsidiaries,the variable interest entities, and the subsidiaries of the variable interest entities (collectively, the “Company”) are prepared in accordance with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (the “U.S. GAAP”), and the differences between U.S. GAAP and the International Financial Reporting Standards (the “IFRS”) issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (together, the “Reconciliation Statement”) have been disclosed in the Appendix — Unaudited Reconciliation Between U.S. GAAP and IFRS attached herein.

PricewaterhouseCoopers, the auditor of the Company in Hong Kong, has performed a limited assurance engagement on the Reconciliation Statement in accordance with International Standards on Assurance Engagements 3000 (Revised) “Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information” issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board.

Appendix

The Unaudited Interim Financial Statements of the Company are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which differ in certain respects from IFRS. The effects of material differences between the Unaudited Interim Financial Statements prepared under U.S. GAAP and IFRS are as follows:

Reconciliation of unaudited condensed consolidated statements of income:

For six months ended June 30,

2023

2024

RMB

RMB

Reconciliation of net income in the consolidated statements of income    

 (in thousands)

Net income as reported under U.S. GAAP

908,900

882,440

IFRS adjustments:

Preferred shares (Note a) 

(64,555)

126,264

Leases (Note b)

(521)

(285)

Share-based compensations (Note c) 

(36,304)

(16,419)

Net income as reported under IFRS

807,520

992,000

 

Reconciliation of unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets:

As of 
December 31,

As of
June 30,

2023

2024

RMB

RMB

Reconciliation of total equity in the consolidated balance sheets

 (in thousands)

Total equity as reported under U.S. GAAP

23,414,305

23,838,220

IFRS adjustments:

Preferred shares (Note a)

1,182,018

1,409,285

Leases (Note b)

(9,536)

(9,821)

Total equity as reported under IFRS                                                            

24,586,787

25,237,684

 

Notes:

Basis of Preparation

The Directors of the Company are responsible for preparation of the Reconciliation Statement in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Hong Kong Listing Rules. The Reconciliation Statement was prepared based on the Company’s unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial information for the six months ended June 30, 2024 prepared under U.S. GAAP, with adjustments made (if any) thereto in arriving at the unaudited financial information of the Company prepared under IFRS. The adjustments reflect the differences between the Company’s accounting policies under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. 

(a)  Preferred Shares

Under U.S. GAAP, the preferred shares of the Company are accounted for as mezzanine equity, which is subsequently accreted to the amount which equals to redemption value of each series of preferred shares.

Under IFRS, the preferred shares, which are redeemable at the option of the holder, represent a financial liability. And the financial liability is measured at fair value and changes in the fair value are reflected in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income. The amount of change in the fair value of the financial liability that is attributable to changes in the credit risk of the liability shall be presented in the consolidated balance sheets as accumulated other comprehensive income; the remaining amount of change in the fair value of the liability shall be presented in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income.

Accordingly, the reconciliation includes a fair value profit change of RMB64.56 million (negative) and RMB126.26 million recognized in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income for each of the six months ended June 30, 2023 and 2024, respectively. The reconciliation also includes the difference between mezzanine equity under U.S. GAAP and financial liabilities under IFRS of RMB1,182.02 million and RMB1,409.29 million as at December 31, 2023 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

(b)  Leases

For operating leases under U.S. GAAP, the subsequent measurement of the lease liability is based on the present value of the remaining lease payments using the discount rate determined at lease commencement, while the right-of-use asset is remeasured at the amount of the lease liability, adjusted for the remaining balance of any lease incentives received, cumulative prepaid or accrued rents, unamortized initial direct costs and any impairment. This treatment under U.S. GAAP results in straight line expense being incurred over the lease term, as opposed to IFRS which generally yields a “front-loaded” expense with more expense recognized in earlier years of the lease.

Accordingly, the reconciliation includes an expenses difference recognized in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income of RMB0.52 million and RMB0.29 million for each of the six months ended June 30, 2023 and 2024, respectively. The reconciliation also includes a difference in total equity of RMB9.54 million and RMB9.82 million as at December 31, 2023 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

(c)  Share-based Compensation

Under U.S. GAAP, the Company has elected to recognize compensation expense using the straight-line method for all share-based awards granted with service conditions that have a graded vesting schedule. For awards with performance condition and multiple service dates, if the performance conditions are all set at inception and independent for each year, each tranche is accounted for as a separate award with its own requisite service period. Compensation cost is recognized over the respective requisite service period separately for each separately-vesting tranche as though each tranche of the award is, in substance, a separate award.

Under IFRS, the accelerated method is required to recognize compensation expense for all employee equity awards granted with graded vesting.

Accordingly, the reconciliation includes an expense recognition difference in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income of RMB36.30 million and RMB16.42 million for each of the six months ended June 30, 2023 and 2024, respectively.

 

[1] The reporting currency of the Company is Renminbi (“RMB”). For readers’ convenience, certain amounts throughout the release are presented in US dollars (“US$”). Unless otherwise noted, all conversions from RMB to US$ are translated at the noon buying rate of US$1.00 to RMB7.2672 on June 28, 2024 in the City of New York for cable transfers of RMB as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. No representation is made that the RMB amounts could have been, or could be, converted into US$ at such rate.

[2] For more information on this and other non-GAAP financial measures, please see the section captioned “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and the tables captioned “Unaudited Reconciliations of Non-GAAP and GAAP Results” set forth at the end of this release.

[3] It represented the loss of an investment with fair value below its initial investment, which was recognized at “interest and investment income, net”. The impact was considered to be not directly related to the Company’s operating activities.

 

View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/autohome-inc-announces-unaudited-second-quarter-and-interim-2024-financial-results-302210891.html

SOURCE Autohome Inc.

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

GMIF2026: AI Inference Powers the “Token Factory” and Drives System-Level Rethinking of Memory & Storage

Published

on

By

SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The 5th GMIF Innovation Summit (Global Memory Innovation Forum 2026, GMIF2026) recently concluded at the Renaissance Shenzhen Bay Hotel. Co-hosted by the Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA) and the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, the summit was themed “The Future Built on AI Memory and Storage.” Now in its fifth edition, GMIF has grown from a regional industry gathering into a benchmark for the global semiconductor memory ecosystem, with diversified programs including keynote sessions, an investment forum, product exhibitions, a global livestream, and a golf friendship match, all centered on the value of memory and storage in the token economy and the AI inference era.

In the opening remarks by Rixin Sun, President of Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA), GMIF’s growth over five consecutive editions was traced from its early days to today. As a platform for global exchange, GMIF is built around the memory value chain, linking wafer IDMs and players in controllers, modules, packaging and testing, equipment and materials, and end applications to promote technical exchange, supply-demand matching, and ecosystem cooperation.

President Sun noted that as AI evolves from generative to agentic, inference efficiency, data scheduling, and system coordination have become shared priorities. Collaboration across the value chain is no longer a traditional supply-demand relationship, but a deeper partnership built around workload requirements, joint product definition, and scenario validation. Looking ahead, GMIF will pursue a more specialized and differentiated format, connecting memory companies with AI compute and end-application players worldwide.

Capital Meets Technology: Memory & Storage Moves to the Center of AI Infrastructure

As AI shifts from model training to large-scale commercial inference, the token is becoming a new unit of value. Inference demands low latency, high concurrency, and sustained throughput, which places memory and storage bandwidth, capacity, and energy efficiency among the variables that shape overall system efficiency and cost.

Daniel Yen of Morgan Stanley projected that global data center capital expenditure will stay strong in the coming years, with more than half of cloud data center capex expected to go to memory & storage (excluding HBM) by 2027. Yen identified six innovation paths to overcome the “memory wall” challenge: process migration, design changes, advanced packaging, memory peripherals, PIM/CIM, and new materials.

Prof. Yimao Cai, Dean of the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, pointed out that HBM remains central to high-end AI compute, but yield, cost, and thermal constraints limit broader adoption. NAND-based high-bandwidth technologies such as HBF have become a major research focus because of their cost advantage, and hybrid multi-media architectures could balance performance, capacity, and cost for deploying models with hundreds of billions of parameters.

Kevin Yoon, CVP & CTO of Samsung Memory China at Samsung Electronics, described how agents are generating massive KV cache demand and driving rapid iteration of tiered storage, citing Samsung’s work on Z-NAND, PCIe Gen6 SSDs, and ultra-high-capacity data center SSDs. Maya Zhang, Senior Director of Product Marketing from Sandisk, called this the first year of the “inference boom.” As inference reaches commercial scale, AI data centers are shifting from cost centers to value and capacity centers, and the evaluation framework is moving from TCO to TVO. NAND is becoming a strategic core component of AI, and the SSD is becoming a “token battery” that greatly improves the economics of the industry through token reuse.

Solidigm and Arm focused on the evolution of system-level design. Benny Ni, GAR Sales VP at Solidigm, noted high-capacity QLC SSDs are being adopted faster, and that memory offloading has moved from an alternative to a core design paradigm for data centers, while liquid cooling has become a prerequisite for unlocking high-end storage performance. John Xavier Lionel, Head of Global Storage Business at Arm, shared competition in the AI era is shifting from simply chasing higher TOPS to building a more efficient system balance among compute, memory, storage, and data movement. Arm’s cloud-edge-device continuum framework balances power, capacity, bandwidth, latency, security, and cost constraints at each tier, so that “the right AI workload runs in the right place.”

Moving from the cloud to the edge, Stanley Huang, AVP of Silicon Motion, stressed that devices are the ultimate carrier of AI experiences and that intelligent storage directly determines real-world device performance. Its PerformaShape technology allocates resources flexibly across different agents and greatly improves read/write consistency.

Sam Sun, Chairman of BIWIN, explained that large-scale AI inference is extending memory demand from data centers to the edge and endpoints, where differing needs in capacity, performance, power, size, and reliability are pushing storage from general-purpose specifications toward deep matching with specific scenarios and platforms. Drawing on full-stack capabilities from media selection and controller and firmware development to advanced packaging, testing, and volume delivery, BIWIN works closely with customers, platforms, and chip makers to tailor products to each use case, shortening development and validation cycles and improving system space, energy efficiency, and performance.

Token Factories Move Enterprise AI from Pilot to Production

As the token becomes the core unit of value, producing tokens efficiently and at low cost has become a shared challenge for enterprise AI adoption worldwide, and the “token factory” is emerging as a new industry paradigm. Tao Zhou, General Manager of the Server Division of Lenovo ISG China, said 80% of enterprises have deployed at least one type of agent, yet fewer than 40% of projects can scale and deliver positive ROI. Lenovo has built a full-stack “token factory” paradigm spanning data governance, compute optimization, and security management to address this.

A solid token factory depends on underlying storage media and architecture. Numbers Law’s PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology and NEXWISE‘s “KuberCloud” token factory solution contributed to full-stack capability from hardware to compute scheduling and model operations. Infplane, Maxio, and Genstoraige lowered the deployment threshold for large on-device models through AI SSD tiered offloading and memory expansion.

Real-world applications are also deepening. SYNCORE has achieved vehicle-cloud embodied intelligence across the whole vehicle. Dify, with its private agent architecture, and Paratera, with its MaaS compute service platform, are moving AI from basic compute supply toward deeper industry intelligence services, accelerating the industrialization of AI.

40 Companies Showcase the Core of the AI Memory & Storage Chain

The concurrent exhibition brought together 40 companies across the full value chain, from memory chips and controllers to compute servers, AIDC services, packaging and testing equipment, and system applications, presenting the latest advances in AI memory and storage from around the world.

Memory IDMs and controller makers led with new products. SanDisk featured its iNAND AT EU752 automotive UFS 4.1, SN861 enterprise NVMe SSD, and BiCS8 QLC NAND. Silicon Motion introduced the SM8466 PCIe Gen6 16-channel controller and the SM2524XT controller for edge SSDs. Maxio, YEESTOR, and other Chinese controller makers showed flagship PCIe Gen4/Gen5 and UFS controllers with enhanced LDPC, a sign that China’s controller portfolio is taking shape and benchmarking itself against leading international standards.

Compute and token factory solutions were another highlight. Lenovo exhibited its WenTian series of AI training-and-inference integrated servers. NEXWISE presented its full-stack token factory hardware and software, with heterogeneous compute management and token-based billing. Paratera showed its intelligent compute cloud and supercomputing cloud services, and Numbers Law demonstrated its PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology, aimed at sharply raising HDD IOPS and throughput. Infplane, Genstoraige, and Quanxing introduced KV cache offload and memory-fusion AI SSD solutions that use storage to share the compute load and significantly cut deployment costs.

Module makers and full-scenario solution providers brought a wide range of products. BIWIN exhibited enterprise SSDs, CXL products, wide-temperature industrial storage, and embedded products spanning AI cloud, edge, and device. KingSpec, POWEV, Topdisk, Barycn, Jielong Storage, HIKSEMI, and others presented industrial-grade, automotive-grade, server, and embedded product families, demonstrating strong volume production and reliable delivery.

Equipment, testing, and materials suppliers rounded out the floor. Attach Point, MICROVIEW, and Maxwell Technologies showed die attach and bonding equipment for 2.5D/3D advanced packaging. OKN Technology, Acroview Technology, Hongjingwei, and Tytantest introduced test and burn-in systems covering SSD, DRAM, and NAND that can accurately reproduce high-load AI I/O scenarios. Hemei Jingyi and Silergy brought storage IC package substrates and dedicated power management ICs. From advanced packaging equipment to test validation to core components, this supporting ecosystem lays the manufacturing foundation for volume production of AI memory and storage and for Chinese suppliers expanding overseas.

GMIF2026 Annual Awards Unveiled: Global Memory & Storage Leaders Build an Open, Collaborative Ecosystem

To recognize companies that have made outstanding contributions to the memory and storage value chain, the summit established the GMIF2026 Annual Awards, which cover memory, compute, packaging and testing equipment, test systems, and end applications across AI infrastructure, and were judged on technological innovation, industry contribution, market service, and real-world results.

Honorees, including Samsung Semiconductor, SanDisk, Solidigm, CXMT, Arm, Lenovo, Dify, Silicon Motion, Infplane, Genstoraige, Numbers Law, Paratera, SYNCORE, NEXWISE, Maxio Technology, BIWIN, Topdisk, KingSpec, POWEV, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, Attach Point, COMIX, Barycn, LKAUTO, Maxwell Technologies, Hemei Jingyi, Silergy, Heyan Technology, ExTripod Electronics, UNIMOS, GBAT, and Tytantest, were recognized for standout achievements in technology breakthroughs, product deployment, ecosystem building, and the industry chain.

Global Livestream and Golf Friendship Match Extend the Boundaries of Industry Cooperation

To join the global ecosystem and expand international cooperation, the summit featured a special Global Livestream by Memory Brands on LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube. Eight brands presented online: BIWIN, Silicon Motion, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, KingSpec, Maxwell Technologies, ExTripod Electronics, and Silergy. They gave overseas audiences a direct look at China’s latest advances in memory chips, advanced packaging, test systems, and other core AI infrastructure components, connecting technology standards, supply chain resources, and market demand across regions.

The momentum carried into the next day. The GMIF2026 “BIWIN Cup” golf friendship match, exclusively sponsored by BIWIN, brought senior executives from across the global memory value chain to the course. After a day of intensive discussion at the main forum, the setting was more relaxed, but the conversations among technology, capital, and markets carried on, helping speed practical cooperation across borders and sectors.

Conclusion

Across the GMIF program, one message stood out: global AI competition is moving beyond the “single-point era” of peak GPU performance into a “system-level era” that integrates storage, compute, networking, and software. In the token economy, memory and storage is shedding its auxiliary role and becoming the strategic foundation of AI inference.

This edition of GMIF brought together capital outlook, frontier technology, product innovation, real-world practice, and ecosystem collaboration, and, with the awards, livestream, and networking events, carried the conversation from ideas to product showcases, overseas exposure, and business deals. Going forward, GMIF will stay focused on the industry’s frontier issues and connect key players across the global memory value chain, promoting joint standards, technology development, and market expansion to open a new chapter for the AI memory and storage industry.

About GMIF

Global Memory Innovation Forum (GMIF) is a premier annual gathering that connects the global memory and storage community. Featuring diverse activities including keynote speeches, roundtable dialogues, supply-demand match-making, product showcases, industry rankings, awards programs, and global livestreaming, GMIF brings together key enterprises across the memory and storage chain, technical experts, terminal companies and investment institutions to exchange insights, build partnerships, and create business opportunities. Learn more about GMIF, please visit https://www.gmif.com.cn/. Follow us on LinkedIn, YouTube and Facebook.

Media Contact:
Carina Gu, wenjing.gu@gmif.com.cn

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gmif2026-ai-inference-powers-the-token-factory-and-drives-system-level-rethinking-of-memory–storage-302912123.html

SOURCE Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA)

Continue Reading

Trending